Matter of Silliman
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.
Appellant had commenced an action against respondent who had been his tenant for a cancellation of the lease and an accounting. While the action was pending the parties entered into an agreement to arbitrate. The agreement recited that Silliman had canceled his lease and agreement and intended to take possession of the leased property; that Carr was willing that, he should do so on proper compensation being made to him, wherefore, “to avoid a recourse to a suit in the courts,” the parties submitted to arbitration “the whole matter of settlement and adjustment of said lease and agreement and…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Pratt v. ConnorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
- Ryan v. DoughertyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
- Zehner v. Lehigh Coal & Navigation Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1898
- Fairchild v. DotenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1871
- Pieratt v. KennedyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1872
3Cited by7 opinions
- Sapp v. BarenfeldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
- Trollope v. JeffriesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
- Fagnani v. Integrity Finance CorporationSuperior Court of Delaware · 1960
- Ames Canning Co. v. Dexter Seed Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1922
- General Metals Corp. v. Precision Lodge 1600California Court of Appeal · 1960
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.